5 ms·

> I "have" ADHD, although I don't believe in it conceptually Congratulations on getting your Doctorate of Psychiatry. Glad you've single handedly debunked a ce

> I "have" ADHD, although I don't believe in it conceptually Congratulations on getting your Doctorate of Psychiatry. Glad you've single handedly debunked a century of study with your belief. On a more serious note, I'm glad your symptoms are addressable with coping mechanisms. A lot of folks can't. And your "40%" is actually closer to 5%, based on scientists who research and give talks on this mental disorder.

ffsm8 2y ago
I think they're just in a bubble, gotta remember that in tech the percentage is bound to be a lot higher Then for the general population. You're also taking that initial statement way too serious, the rest of the comment kinda contextualized it and essentially admitted that it does exist, but that it's more of a range then a binary. And that's in line with the medical science. I've actually never heard anyone describe it as a binary, but maybe that's just my bubble.
- falcolas 2y ago
  Thanks to another prevalent symptom of ADHD - emotional disregulation - I very well could have overreacted. In my defense, the "It's not a real thing" and "you're just lazy" really get old after the 100th time hearing them this week. Control over concentration is only one symptom of ADHD, and there are discernible differences that make ADHD brains look different in CT and MRI scans. So it's a bit closer to binary than "everyone in the world is somewhere on the ADHD spectrum". Plus, the final word in the ADHD acronym is "Disorder" - so if it's not impairing your ability to live and participate in society, by definition you don't have ADHD.
  - quacked 2y ago
    I wouldn't say you overreacted. It's impossible to both convey and read tone over the internet, so there's no way for you to know that I don't mean to be insulting. I also like to write in a polarizing and cynical manner. Whatever negative label you've had applied to you as a result of ADHD, I likely have had the same applied to me. My choice to not use any stimulants is both indeed a privilege of my "symptoms" not reaching a point where I can't function in day-to-day life, but also an ideological choice, because I have hurt my own career, screwed up projects, and progressed much more slowly than I would have if I were on Adderall or Ritalin or whatever else they're prescribing now. The reason that I persist with the claim that "ADHD doesn't exist" is exactly what you said here: > If it's not impairing your ability to live and participate in society, by definition you don't have ADHD. The problem is not my brain, the problem is the arbitrary demands of society. This is not an emotional attempt to preserve my self-esteem--I like myself just fine and always have--but a pragmatic observation that diagnosing "disorders" with acronyms and developing "treatments" legitimizes the framing that the society that I'm chafing with as a result of having some cognitive deficits relative to the rest of the population is somehow more "real" or "official" or "objective" than I am. It's like if every day to get to work, you had to walk up huge stairs, and anyone under 5'6" had a tough time getting up the stairs, and then doctors came up with HDS (Height Deficiency Syndrome) and prescribed growth hormones and stilts. You get a bunch of people walking around on stilts telling each other they have HDS. Over time, you barely even need to be examined to get a stilt prescription, they just give you the HDS diagnosis soon as you look like you're not going to pass 5'6" by 18. Now you've got a society that is comfortable with the knowledge that short people have HDS and tall people don't, without thinking about the fact that whoever built the stairs could simply have made smaller stairs that other people could walk up more easily. I would really prefer that people start wondering en masse if, in the age of incredible technological abundance we currently enjoy, it's really necessary that every industry, even ones that don't require highly time-sensitive detail-oriented work, function with the rigor and precision of a munitions factory.
    - falcolas 2y ago
      > the problem is the arbitrary demands of society Well, society isn't going to change to make 5% of the population with an invisible disorder better. And I think even given that, the "it's society that's the problem" is still wrong. Because (from another thread), ADHD is more than just a concentration problem. It's a disorder that encompasses the symptoms of time blindness, a lack of ability to control focus, emotional disregulation, rejection sensitivity dysphoria, reduced working memory, an inability to form habits, and executive dysfunction. No number of "hunter gatherer" society norms would explain all of these.
cj 2y ago
I think their opinion is along the lines of “no one is ‘inflicted’ by ADHD, and there is also no permanent cure for it, because the disorder can simply be redefined as being those who are in the lowest quartile or even the lowest 10% of X, Y, Z cognitive metrics.” Imagine there were a pill that could boost your IQ score by 25% but in order to receive a prescription you need to have an IQ in the lowest quartile. Such a pill could also help already smart people simply become smarter. Thats the main contention: there are two groups: (a) people who actually experience debilitating symptoms that significantly impact their life requiring medication, and (b) people who are simply looking for an edge by using medication, perhaps even convinced to do so by ads on TikTok or Instagram under the guise if ADHD. Edit: The IQ score medication analogy is only meant to be illustrative. I don’t mean to imply that IQ and ADHD are somehow connected.
- falcolas 2y ago
  > because the disorder can simply be redefined Respectfully, disorder already has a meaning. And it's a meaning enshrined in medicine and law (ADA). "Redefining" disorder does nothing but hurt people who have a disorder. And ADHD has no correlation with IQ (which I think you know, but it' not just a focus sliding scale either). It's a disorder that encompasses the symptoms of time blindness, a lack of ability to control focus, emotional disregulation, rejection sensitivity dysphoria, reduced working memory, an inability to form habits, and executive dysfunction. It's also associated with a physical change in the brain.
  - cj 2y ago
    I added an “edit” to clarify I don’t believe IQ and ADHD are connected. “Redefining” could have instead said “Reinterpreting”. The reality is the diagnosis for these disorders are completely subjective. The same logic could be applied to depression and SSRIs. It’s not like a blood test that tells me I have high cholesterol. It takes dozens of hours with a qualified medical professional to seriously diagnose someone with high confidence. Also agree there are studies correlating it with physical changes in the brain. But those studies aren’t fully fleshed out and not useful for diagnosis. There isn’t a brain scan that can detect ADHD.
saithound 2y ago
From the guidelines: "don't be snarky". I disagree strongly with the grandparent comment, but this is about as useful as commenting "Congratulations on getting your Doctorate of Sacred Theology. Glad you've single handedly debunked a millenium of study with your belief" would be when I comment that I'm an atheist.
- falcolas 2y ago
  FWIW, this comment falls afoul of the guidelines as well, and is even less useful since I did follow my opening with a real discussion. To quote the guidelines, report it to the moderators if you feel it's sufficiently problematic. Have a good one!
  - saithound 2y ago
    I didn't say that your comment was an egregious violation of the guideline - had it been, I'd have reported it instead. I reminded you that the guideline exists because it's good advice in this case, and had you edited your comment to get rid of the snark (as the guidelines suggest), you could have had a chance of persuading instead of alienating its audience. Too bad.

ffsm8 2y ago

I think they're just in a bubble, gotta remember that in tech the percentage is bound to be a lot higher Then for the general population. You're also taking that initial statement way too serious, the rest of the comment kinda contextualized it and essentially admitted that it does exist, but that it's more of a range then a binary. And that's in line with the medical science. I've actually never heard anyone describe it as a binary, but maybe that's just my bubble.

falcolas 2y ago
Thanks to another prevalent symptom of ADHD - emotional disregulation - I very well could have overreacted. In my defense, the "It's not a real thing" and "you're just lazy" really get old after the 100th time hearing them this week. Control over concentration is only one symptom of ADHD, and there are discernible differences that make ADHD brains look different in CT and MRI scans. So it's a bit closer to binary than "everyone in the world is somewhere on the ADHD spectrum". Plus, the final word in the ADHD acronym is "Disorder" - so if it's not impairing your ability to live and participate in society, by definition you don't have ADHD.
- quacked 2y ago
  I wouldn't say you overreacted. It's impossible to both convey and read tone over the internet, so there's no way for you to know that I don't mean to be insulting. I also like to write in a polarizing and cynical manner. Whatever negative label you've had applied to you as a result of ADHD, I likely have had the same applied to me. My choice to not use any stimulants is both indeed a privilege of my "symptoms" not reaching a point where I can't function in day-to-day life, but also an ideological choice, because I have hurt my own career, screwed up projects, and progressed much more slowly than I would have if I were on Adderall or Ritalin or whatever else they're prescribing now. The reason that I persist with the claim that "ADHD doesn't exist" is exactly what you said here: > If it's not impairing your ability to live and participate in society, by definition you don't have ADHD. The problem is not my brain, the problem is the arbitrary demands of society. This is not an emotional attempt to preserve my self-esteem--I like myself just fine and always have--but a pragmatic observation that diagnosing "disorders" with acronyms and developing "treatments" legitimizes the framing that the society that I'm chafing with as a result of having some cognitive deficits relative to the rest of the population is somehow more "real" or "official" or "objective" than I am. It's like if every day to get to work, you had to walk up huge stairs, and anyone under 5'6" had a tough time getting up the stairs, and then doctors came up with HDS (Height Deficiency Syndrome) and prescribed growth hormones and stilts. You get a bunch of people walking around on stilts telling each other they have HDS. Over time, you barely even need to be examined to get a stilt prescription, they just give you the HDS diagnosis soon as you look like you're not going to pass 5'6" by 18. Now you've got a society that is comfortable with the knowledge that short people have HDS and tall people don't, without thinking about the fact that whoever built the stairs could simply have made smaller stairs that other people could walk up more easily. I would really prefer that people start wondering en masse if, in the age of incredible technological abundance we currently enjoy, it's really necessary that every industry, even ones that don't require highly time-sensitive detail-oriented work, function with the rigor and precision of a munitions factory.
  - falcolas 2y ago
    > the problem is the arbitrary demands of society Well, society isn't going to change to make 5% of the population with an invisible disorder better. And I think even given that, the "it's society that's the problem" is still wrong. Because (from another thread), ADHD is more than just a concentration problem. It's a disorder that encompasses the symptoms of time blindness, a lack of ability to control focus, emotional disregulation, rejection sensitivity dysphoria, reduced working memory, an inability to form habits, and executive dysfunction. No number of "hunter gatherer" society norms would explain all of these.

cj 2y ago

I think their opinion is along the lines of “no one is ‘inflicted’ by ADHD, and there is also no permanent cure for it, because the disorder can simply be redefined as being those who are in the lowest quartile or even the lowest 10% of X, Y, Z cognitive metrics.” Imagine there were a pill that could boost your IQ score by 25% but in order to receive a prescription you need to have an IQ in the lowest quartile. Such a pill could also help already smart people simply become smarter. Thats the main contention: there are two groups: (a) people who actually experience debilitating symptoms that significantly impact their life requiring medication, and (b) people who are simply looking for an edge by using medication, perhaps even convinced to do so by ads on TikTok or Instagram under the guise if ADHD. Edit: The IQ score medication analogy is only meant to be illustrative. I don’t mean to imply that IQ and ADHD are somehow connected.

falcolas 2y ago
> because the disorder can simply be redefined Respectfully, disorder already has a meaning. And it's a meaning enshrined in medicine and law (ADA). "Redefining" disorder does nothing but hurt people who have a disorder. And ADHD has no correlation with IQ (which I think you know, but it' not just a focus sliding scale either). It's a disorder that encompasses the symptoms of time blindness, a lack of ability to control focus, emotional disregulation, rejection sensitivity dysphoria, reduced working memory, an inability to form habits, and executive dysfunction. It's also associated with a physical change in the brain.
- cj 2y ago
  I added an “edit” to clarify I don’t believe IQ and ADHD are connected. “Redefining” could have instead said “Reinterpreting”. The reality is the diagnosis for these disorders are completely subjective. The same logic could be applied to depression and SSRIs. It’s not like a blood test that tells me I have high cholesterol. It takes dozens of hours with a qualified medical professional to seriously diagnose someone with high confidence. Also agree there are studies correlating it with physical changes in the brain. But those studies aren’t fully fleshed out and not useful for diagnosis. There isn’t a brain scan that can detect ADHD.

saithound 2y ago

From the guidelines: "don't be snarky". I disagree strongly with the grandparent comment, but this is about as useful as commenting "Congratulations on getting your Doctorate of Sacred Theology. Glad you've single handedly debunked a millenium of study with your belief" would be when I comment that I'm an atheist.

falcolas 2y ago
FWIW, this comment falls afoul of the guidelines as well, and is even less useful since I did follow my opening with a real discussion. To quote the guidelines, report it to the moderators if you feel it's sufficiently problematic. Have a good one!
- saithound 2y ago
  I didn't say that your comment was an egregious violation of the guideline - had it been, I'd have reported it instead. I reminded you that the guideline exists because it's good advice in this case, and had you edited your comment to get rid of the snark (as the guidelines suggest), you could have had a chance of persuading instead of alienating its audience. Too bad.